-
It isn't, no. It's one of those things people never understand until they fall of their own accord (usually over a kerb of some kind, with low kerbs with about a 5cm upstand particularly treacherous) or crash into a pedestrian/a shop's outside vegetable stack/an A-board/over a dog leash/café chair/café table/rubbish bag, etc. I've seen all of these things happen and more. Statistically, a lot of cyclist injuries occur without any driver involvement. The aforementioned low kerbs are a source of serious injury especially for elderly people, it seems, as they may fall awkwardly. Many hips have been broken that way.
Strictly speaking, one should be comparing like for like, and it is, I think, self-evident that riding at the same speed along the footway as along the carriageway usually means a higher risk on the footway. However, oddly, riding slowly along the footway isn't necessarily 'safer', mainly because of the low kerb issue. People hit them at odd angles, they are often irregularly-shaped, and with a bit of a low-speed wobble can easily go down.
Oliver Schick-
Ah, gotcha. Yeah kerb hopping can easily go wrong.
In Belfast the main risks (for cyclists, as some twats really annoy and sometimes endanger peds by cycling way too fast / inconsiderately on the footpath) are more closes passes/YPLAC in the cycle lane.
So I was more comparing "nice wide footway with no funny hops taking at a considerate speed" VS "cycling on road having to avoid parked cars/side swipes/people up your rear light" but yes makes sense, you can hurt yourself on footpaths too.
JWestland
The footway isn't safer for cyclists?
Not saying you should cycle on it, but there are no risky overtakes, lorries... Maybe however my intuition is completely at odds with statistics :)